[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf60548e-03ae-6a13-2449-9a981a7ab84e@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 20:36:11 +0530
From: Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@...eaurora.org>
To: Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Jordan Crouse <jordan@...micpenguin.net>,
Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>,
Sharat Masetty <smasetty@...eaurora.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
"open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU"
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU"
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] drm/msm/a6xx: update a6xx_ucode_check_version for
a660
On 5/13/2021 10:44 PM, Jonathan Marek wrote:
> Accept all SQE firmware versions for A660.
>
> Re-organize the function a bit and print an error message for unexpected
> GPU IDs instead of failing silently.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c | 36 +++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
> index 3cc23057b11d..ec66a24fc37e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu.c
> @@ -697,6 +697,11 @@ static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu,
> * Targets up to a640 (a618, a630 and a640) need to check for a
> * microcode version that is patched to support the whereami opcode or
> * one that is new enough to include it by default.
> + *
> + * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be
> + * equal to or newer than 0.95 for other security fixes
> + *
> + * a660 targets have all the critical security fixes from the start
> */
> if (adreno_is_a618(adreno_gpu) || adreno_is_a630(adreno_gpu) ||
> adreno_is_a640(adreno_gpu)) {
> @@ -720,27 +725,20 @@ static bool a6xx_ucode_check_version(struct a6xx_gpu *a6xx_gpu,
> DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev,
> "a630 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n",
> buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x190);
> - } else {
> - /*
> - * a650 tier targets don't need whereami but still need to be
> - * equal to or newer than 0.95 for other security fixes
> - */
> - if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) {
> - if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x095) {
> - ret = true;
> - goto out;
> - }
> -
> - DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev,
> - "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n",
> - buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x095);
> + } else if (adreno_is_a650(adreno_gpu)) {
> + if ((buf[0] & 0xfff) >= 0x095) {
> + ret = true;
> + goto out;
> }
>
> - /*
> - * When a660 is added those targets should return true here
> - * since those have all the critical security fixes built in
> - * from the start
> - */
> + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev,
> + "a650 SQE ucode is too old. Have version %x need at least %x\n",
> + buf[0] & 0xfff, 0x095);
> + } else if (adreno_is_a660(adreno_gpu)) {
> + ret = true;
> + } else {
> + DRM_DEV_ERROR(&gpu->pdev->dev,
> + "unknown GPU, add it to a6xx_ucode_check_version()!!\n");
> }
> out:
> msm_gem_put_vaddr(obj);
>
Can we squash this patch with the previous one?
-Akhil.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists